| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Court to hear US consulate bombing convict's appeal in three months |
| 2008-03-19 |
| An appeal preferred by Anwarul Haque, convicted and sentenced by an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC-III) for a bomb attack on the US consulate, was admitted for regular hearing by an Anti-Terrorism Appellate (ATA) bench of the Sindh High Court Tuesday. The bench of Justice Qaiser Iqbal and Justice Syed Mehmood Alam Rizvi ordered for the appeal to be fixed after three months. The appellant/accused has assailed the death sentence on four counts of murder, life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 500,000. If he defaults on the payment he is liable to serve another three years in prison. Usman Ghani, a co-accused, was exonerated. Accused Zafar is absconding while the suicide bomber was identified as Muhammad Tahir. According to the prosecution, based on a complaint filed by SHO Artillery Maidan police station, SIP Farooq Umar, a blast was heard at 09:05 a.m. at the back of the Marriot hotel. The suicide bomber targeted a station wagon of the US Consulate at Karachi, killing the driver and diplomat David Foy, a security official and a worker at a makeshift canteen. Dozens of vehicles were damaged. The appeal was filed through counsel M. Ilyas Khan and Muhammad Farooq advocates. The appellant maintains that the trial court erred in convicting the appellant on the basis of the most unreliable, unconvincing, untrustworthy chance witnesses who claimed to be available at the scene of the crime while dozens who were genuinely present were not examined as witnesses. The confession by the accused was also not admissible under law and the mandatory requirements for a confession were not fulfilled, maintains the appeal, adding that “the most important eyewitness, Ali Zaman, who claimed to be a waiter at the makeshift hotel failed to prove employment at the outlet. The prosecution also failed to prove conspiracy and common intention of the accused/appellant and alleged suicide bomber,” the appeal maintains. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #1 The appellant maintains that the trial court erred in convicting the appellant on the basis of the most unreliable, unconvincing, untrustworthy chance witnesses who claimed,,, He was a Druid not a Muslim? |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2008-03-19 07:53 |